7 ms·

Seems there are two things going on here that is being conflated. 1. The amount of "culture" being created has to be like a magnitude of order greater than 25

Seems there are two things going on here that is being conflated. 1. The amount of "culture" being created has to be like a magnitude of order greater than 25 years ago. Of course you can't watch all those shows and movies't now. There are too many and it's too much. 2. The algorithms were developed to help with this problem. They are just a poor match for the problem.

pimlottc 1y ago
The algorithms are a poor match because they were primarily developed to benefit content providers, not users.
- paleotrope 1y ago
  Oh that's definitely true. I mean you can definitely see the conflict of interest between say you know HBO Max trying to get their content viewed versus any other streamer
- Nasrudith 1y ago
  What on earth makes you think that the prior state of affairs was to benefit the users?
whilenot-dev 1y ago
I would make a different list of points: 1. The "new" of today is no match for the "new" of back then: Breaking Bad is as good for a first binge today as it was 2008. I'm currently watching Mad Men for the first time and can't see how anything could've been made differently 18 years(!) ago. That's 7 seasons of a well-made show and I couldn't care less for any Netflix production that gets cancelled after its 2nd season. The change in quality from Star Trek: TNG to Breaking Bad seems like a huge leap, do these leaps exist anymore? 2. There is no discussion about any current Zeitgeist, everything feels intermixed and nothing is ever finished. Leaving politics aside here, consumers are beta testers without any way to provide direct feedback to producers (one that isn't public outrage of some kind) - every other usual customer interaction is just a waste of your time. Big studios are busy milking "universes" that have been created pre-social media. 3. Algorithms are part of the creation for these problems, not their solution. Big tech just doesn't like this take, creative work is risky, businesses need to scale up quickly and efficiently.
- deleted 1y ago
  [deleted]
- ghaff 1y ago
  >The "new" of today is no match for the "new" of back then Breaking Bad is almost certainly one of the best series of all time that started strong and ended strong. There were a TON of shows in that period that were weak or that, at a minimum, sort of petered out. Yes, a lot of shows probably get canceled too quickly. Then there's Grey's Anatomy because it still apparently has lazy viewers who will tune in each week.
- paleotrope 1y ago
  Re: 2, That's definitely another part of it. There's this timelessness about the current culture that I am not sure where it's coming from. I find myself encountering bits of culture (tv/movies/music/books) that could be from today, or from 10 years ago, and little way to determine from when. And there's so much of it now.
- BlueTemplar 1y ago
  Having watched TNG and BB for the first time roughly at the same time, I disagree it's that of a huge leap. (Quality is about much more than cinematography, and these two shows are just too different anyway.) Also we have probably reached almost the top of what is possible for a TV show, especially in what matters the most (writing, acting).
  - whilenot-dev 1y ago
    I wasn't referring to the cinematography. While that one's certainly noticeable, I think the way the shows narrative is structured and builds up over time is the true leap. The X-Files or Twin Peaks were maybe more cohesive, but that's also because mystery box shows wouldn't work very well any other way. Maybe that's it... cohesiveness found its way into TV productions, and it took mystery box shows to make that quality really obvious as a recipe?
    - Ekaros 1y ago
idoubtit 1y ago
> 1. The amount of "culture" being created has to be like a magnitude of order greater than 25 years ago. For music, I'm not even sure the cultural creation has increased. A few decades ago, there were scores of indie bands. In high school I knew a few friends that were playing in amateur rock bands. Later on, when I traveled in foreign lands, most people I met listened to local music, e.g. Turkish songs which were a mix of tradition and modern influence. In my latest travel, everyone was listening to the same globbish junk. I don't have any stats, but I suspect the music production is more homogeneous and less creative. There is less geographic variation. At least one source of creation has disappeared: musical bands are dead, except for the industrial kind, à la K-pop. Overall, I don't think the creation level is higher than 25 years ago. > 2. The algorithms were developed to help with this problem. They are just a poor match for the problem. I disagree with the OP that the algorithms are necessarily bad. For instance, once in a while, they could suggest a very different style to help broaden your tastes. Some already do that. But algorithms can't compare with recommendations by friends. There were music that I would have instantly rejected if the CD hadn't been given by a friend. And sometimes you have to persevere and learn to like a music. When the curator is a human I like, I try harder.
- gargron 1y ago
  I'm sorry, but by what metric are musical bands "dead"? I'm asking because I follow a lot of bands that are actively releasing new music and touring across the US and Europe. Not to mention the musical festivals.

pimlottc 1y ago

The algorithms are a poor match because they were primarily developed to benefit content providers, not users.

paleotrope 1y ago
Oh that's definitely true. I mean you can definitely see the conflict of interest between say you know HBO Max trying to get their content viewed versus any other streamer
Nasrudith 1y ago
What on earth makes you think that the prior state of affairs was to benefit the users?

whilenot-dev 1y ago

I would make a different list of points: 1. The "new" of today is no match for the "new" of back then: Breaking Bad is as good for a first binge today as it was 2008. I'm currently watching Mad Men for the first time and can't see how anything could've been made differently 18 years(!) ago. That's 7 seasons of a well-made show and I couldn't care less for any Netflix production that gets cancelled after its 2nd season. The change in quality from Star Trek: TNG to Breaking Bad seems like a huge leap, do these leaps exist anymore? 2. There is no discussion about any current Zeitgeist, everything feels intermixed and nothing is ever finished. Leaving politics aside here, consumers are beta testers without any way to provide direct feedback to producers (one that isn't public outrage of some kind) - every other usual customer interaction is just a waste of your time. Big studios are busy milking "universes" that have been created pre-social media. 3. Algorithms are part of the creation for these problems, not their solution. Big tech just doesn't like this take, creative work is risky, businesses need to scale up quickly and efficiently.

deleted 1y ago
[deleted]
ghaff 1y ago
>The "new" of today is no match for the "new" of back then Breaking Bad is almost certainly one of the best series of all time that started strong and ended strong. There were a TON of shows in that period that were weak or that, at a minimum, sort of petered out. Yes, a lot of shows probably get canceled too quickly. Then there's Grey's Anatomy because it still apparently has lazy viewers who will tune in each week.
paleotrope 1y ago
Re: 2, That's definitely another part of it. There's this timelessness about the current culture that I am not sure where it's coming from. I find myself encountering bits of culture (tv/movies/music/books) that could be from today, or from 10 years ago, and little way to determine from when. And there's so much of it now.
BlueTemplar 1y ago
Having watched TNG and BB for the first time roughly at the same time, I disagree it's that of a huge leap. (Quality is about much more than cinematography, and these two shows are just too different anyway.) Also we have probably reached almost the top of what is possible for a TV show, especially in what matters the most (writing, acting).
- whilenot-dev 1y ago
  I wasn't referring to the cinematography. While that one's certainly noticeable, I think the way the shows narrative is structured and builds up over time is the true leap. The X-Files or Twin Peaks were maybe more cohesive, but that's also because mystery box shows wouldn't work very well any other way. Maybe that's it... cohesiveness found its way into TV productions, and it took mystery box shows to make that quality really obvious as a recipe?
  - Ekaros 1y ago

idoubtit 1y ago

> 1. The amount of "culture" being created has to be like a magnitude of order greater than 25 years ago. For music, I'm not even sure the cultural creation has increased. A few decades ago, there were scores of indie bands. In high school I knew a few friends that were playing in amateur rock bands. Later on, when I traveled in foreign lands, most people I met listened to local music, e.g. Turkish songs which were a mix of tradition and modern influence. In my latest travel, everyone was listening to the same globbish junk. I don't have any stats, but I suspect the music production is more homogeneous and less creative. There is less geographic variation. At least one source of creation has disappeared: musical bands are dead, except for the industrial kind, à la K-pop. Overall, I don't think the creation level is higher than 25 years ago. > 2. The algorithms were developed to help with this problem. They are just a poor match for the problem. I disagree with the OP that the algorithms are necessarily bad. For instance, once in a while, they could suggest a very different style to help broaden your tastes. Some already do that. But algorithms can't compare with recommendations by friends. There were music that I would have instantly rejected if the CD hadn't been given by a friend. And sometimes you have to persevere and learn to like a music. When the curator is a human I like, I try harder.

gargron 1y ago
I'm sorry, but by what metric are musical bands "dead"? I'm asking because I follow a lot of bands that are actively releasing new music and touring across the US and Europe. Not to mention the musical festivals.